| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
109
   |
Posted - 2012.09.08 14:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm glad to see the CSM has spent its time discussing issues that affect EVE as a whole, as opposed to immediately jumping down the line of "how can we make sure Mittens doesn't get elected to the #1 spot on the CSM for the third consecutive term?"
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 16:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
serras bang wrote:
the descusion aint about goons lets keeps on subject the descusion how to broadly make it fair but i say again a lot and i mean a lot of hi sec players do not know of csm. and i made a few suggestions further up up seams to have been over ridden by goons complaining (i wasnt gonna stoop to this but there it is).
Since when has "pointing out the holes in your logic so large it could comfortably accommodate a space shuttle" been "complaining"?
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 17:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Discussion about electoral reform has been kicked around for much longer than a few months, this is hardly some new, strange obsession of CSM7's. Players have been talking about this for years, and will very likely continue until we actually see electoral reform.
Unless you have a vote on electoral reform all you really know is a couple of people want electoral reform really loudly.
What kind of vote should we have on electoral reform? First past the post? Single transferrable vote? Alternative vote? Condorcet cloneproof Schwartz sequential dropping? :ohdear:
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 23:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
serras bang wrote:
there was nothing that stood out to make me pay atention and i got no mail from anyone in this mass spam
Did you even start the game client? How could you miss the big "vote" banner without being wilfully ignorant of the entire CSM process?
It's reasonable to assume that someone who's managed to avoid all exposure to the CSM process, yet who is forced to vote, will pick candidates at random. This means that it'll artificially inflate the perceived number of people who voted for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate, while having no effect on the winner or their absolute margin of victory.
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 19:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Seleene wrote: If you don't like this initial proposal, counter it with your own and let's see what we can all come up with
Proposal 1: Don't change anything.
If you're going to insist on change for change's sake, or to avoid "disenfranchising" the people who've voted for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate,
Proposal 2: Single Transferrable Vote. I've even found a GPL python implementation for you, in order to minimise the effort in implementing it.
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 23:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
And yes those 10k wasted votes have to do with how the election/voting system works. Kind of a "duh" response
Uh, surely it's to do with placating the fourth estate, given they weren't wasted (except for, possibly, the overvotes) until after the results had been announced?
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 00:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
Andski wrote:can someone explain Trebor's idea that voters who vote for candidates who later lose are "disenfranchised"
Well, you see, I voted for John McCaine in 2008, and as he's not currently President, I'm disenfranchised.
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 01:31:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Poetic Stanziel: Happy CCP threw out 10,000 votes.
How does CD-"STV" stop CCP from dismissing someone after the election results have been announced?
~ |
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
126
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 05:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
All this threadnought has accomplished has derailed any hope of public discussion and provided encouragement for CSM/CCP to figure things out ourselves.
"We don't like the public's opinion, so we're going to go full steam ahead, anyway."
~ |
| |
|